Check out my new course Learn you some Lambda best practice for great good! and learn the best practices for performance, cost, security, resilience, observability and scalability.
The number 145 is well known for the property that the sum of the factorial of its digits is equal to 145:
1! + 4! + 5! = 1 + 24 + 120 = 145
Perhaps less well known is 169, in that it produces the longest chain of numbers that link back to 169; it turns out that there are only three such loops that exist:
169 363601 1454 169
871 45361 871
872 45362 872
It is not difficult to prove that EVERY starting number will eventually get stuck in a loop. For example,
69 363600 1454 169 363601 ( 1454)
78 45360 871 45361 ( 871)
540 145 ( 145)
Starting with 69 produces a chain of five non-repeating terms, but the longest non-repeating chain with a starting number below one million is sixty terms.
How many chains, with a starting number below one million, contain exactly sixty non-repeating terms?
The solution I have here caches the previous results to avoid duplicated work, this complicates the code slightly but it should still be fairly easy to follow. The key thing here is the recursive function processChainRec which recursively generate the next number in the chain until it hits one of two conditions:
- you hit a number already in the chain (hence the end of the non-repeating chain)
you hit a number whose non-repeating chain length has been cached
In the first case, suppose you have [69, 363600, 1454, 169, 363601] in the list already, and then the next number is 1454, which is in the list with index 2. At this point, you can work out the non-repeating chain length for 69, 363600 and 1454:
69 : list.length – index = 5 – 0 = 5
363600 : list.length – index = 5 – 1 = 4
1454 : list.length – index = 5 – 2 = 3
Hit three eggs with one stone? Awesome
For the second case, suppose you had already come across 1454 before and have already calculated its non-repeating chain length, now you have [69, 363600] in the list and 1454 pop outs of the hat. So a quick look up in the cached data tells you that 1454 has a non-repeating chain of 3 terms, so to apply that knowledge to 69 and 363600:
69 : list.length – index + 3 = 2 – 0 + 3 = 5
363600 : list.length – index + 3 = 2 – 1 + 3 = 4
I specialise in rapidly transitioning teams to serverless and building production-ready services on AWS.
Are you struggling with serverless or need guidance on best practices? Do you want someone to review your architecture and help you avoid costly mistakes down the line? Whatever the case, I’m here to help.
Check out my new course, Learn you some Lambda best practice for great good! In this course, you will learn best practices for working with AWS Lambda in terms of performance, cost, security, scalability, resilience and observability. Enrol now and enjoy a special preorder price of £9.99 (~$13).
Are you working with Serverless and looking for expert training to level-up your skills? Or are you looking for a solid foundation to start from? Look no further, register for my Production-Ready Serverless workshop to learn how to build production-grade Serverless applications!
Here is a complete list of all my posts on serverless and AWS Lambda. In the meantime, here are a few of my most popular blog posts.
- Lambda optimization tip – enable HTTP keep-alive
- You are thinking about serverless costs all wrong
- Many faced threats to Serverless security
- We can do better than percentile latencies
- I’m afraid you’re thinking about AWS Lambda cold starts all wrong
- Yubl’s road to Serverless
- AWS Lambda – should you have few monolithic functions or many single-purposed functions?
- AWS Lambda – compare coldstart time with different languages, memory and code sizes
- Guys, we’re doing pagination wrong